From Superman to the Wizard of Oz, the moderator must play a host of roles for every project

Wearing many hats

Editor's note: Dr. Murray Simon is president of D/R/S HealthCare Consultants, a pharmaceutical marketing research firm based in Charlotte, N.C.

One of the aspects of qualitative research that invariably gets my adrenaline pumping is the fact that as a moderator, you never know what's going to happen until you are actually in the interviewing process. A good moderator has to be able to think fast on his/her feet and often has to quickly make adjustments to move the interview (or group) in a more productive direction.

Of late, however, I often find myself questioning my true (perhaps changing) role in this dynamic drama called qualitative market research:

• Am I a producer with responsibilities for bringing together the essential components necessary to assure a positive end result?
• Am I a director who is expected to motivate and guide the various participants throughout the study?
• Am I an actor who must play whatever role is demanded of him in order to ensure success?
• Am I all three?

Pervasive negativity

In qualitative research conferences that I have attended and in casual conversations with market research colleagues, I have frequently come across a pervasive note of negativity and cynicism aimed at those who have a direct impact on our paychecks, a.k.a. our clients. Over the past few years I have heard a lot of commentary from qualitative researchers related to primary client contacts becoming younger, levels of market research experience becoming lower and problems in the field (often predictable at a rather early stage) becoming more commonplace.

I began thinking about this scenario in earnest a while back when a tearful facility hostess took me aside to ask that I please try to establish a measure of control over "my people" in the viewing room (a continuously warring group of dissidents made up of representatives from brand management, internal market research, two ad agencies and a brand image consultant) because their combative tone was disturbing others who were working elsewhere in the facility.

My people in the viewing room? My control problem? My responsibility?

I hate to start an article with "I've been doing qualitative market research for a long time" because it calls to mind the image of a dinosaur attempting one last roar. But the fact is, I have been at it a long time and I think a bit of constructive roaring is very much needed today. And although I am an independent moderator, conversations with qualitative researchers who work for relatively large research suppliers have led to similar conclusions.

To quote Bob Dylan, "The times they are a-changing" - and that's the good news. The bad news is that many qualitative market research changes are being initiated by people (a.k.a. clients) who do not have a "been there/done that" historical market research perspective to guide their thinking. A lot of brand management and market research decision-making responsibility is being put in the hands of some very bright people who are new to the industry and are being challenged to "make something positive happen." In their fervor to respond to this challenge (and with insufficient research experience to guide them), they are sometimes motivated to try to reinvent the market research wheel, an often problematic endeavor.

Moderators should be partners in the research process, delivering experienced input on such matters as screener development, writing the discussion guide, suggesting interviewing techniques that will produce a richer array of cognitive input and, most importantly, acting as an unbiased third party in the development and analysis of study results. Too often, however, many of today's clients seem to consider the moderator to be a vehicle that gets them from point A (initiation of the study) to point B (completion of the study). I base this statement on a number of recent comments made by several colleagues with particular reference to issues such as:

• The moderator often may not see the screener until recruitment has begun.
• Discussion guides are frequently written by the client: the moderator's input is often not actively solicited until the first few interviews have been completed and the puzzled look on respondents' faces makes plain the need for discussion guide modification.
• Proposals and study protocols that were previously signed off on go through a number of revisions after the project is underway, i.e., the plane is still being built after takeoff.
• The moderator is instructed, often in less than subtle terms, to adapt his/her moderating style (perhaps based on several years of experience) to consistently mirror the client's rather distinctive philosophy (perhaps based on several months of experience) of qualitative research interviewing.

Pardon me (sir or madam client), would you like to: ask the questions as written and wait for the responses or attack and take no prisoners?

• By the end of the first day of interviews, the client's hidden agenda often shows up on the job and tries to become the engine that drives the train, i.e., your client is leaning on the research lamppost for support of pre-existing ideas rather than for illumination of new ideas.
• A client wants 12-13-hour days of IDIs because they produce a greater number of (quantifiable?) completions for the money and time invested (as well as producing a moderator with a fried brain).
• Clients are (strongly) requesting more statistical tables and tabulated response breakdowns in "qualitative" reports.
• Clients want reports within two to three days after completion of the fieldwork. Result: analysis indigestion.
• The client profusely congratulates you on a job well done - and awards the next phase of the study to someone else because his or her estimate was a bit lower.

How many of these situations have you experienced? When you walk into those interview rooms, who are you?

- Are you a seasoned professional who is excited and challenged about the potential for being creative and making something exciting happen?

- Are you an intelligent chameleon changing your interviewing style to better blend in with your clients' expectations?

- Or are you a market research puppet?

Perhaps you need to be a magician. A friend of mine who is a professional magician likes to say, "There is no such thing as a magician, only actors playing the part of magicians." In other words, it takes more than wearing a tuxedo and knowing how to perform tricks (or how to moderate); the key to success also involves conveying the image of a magician (moderator) to your audience (client).

Larger applications

I'm beginning to think this actor/magician paradigm may also have larger applications for qualitative market research. Perhaps some recent personal examples from the field will help further illustrate the many roles that the moderator must play.

• A potential client asks what I would charge to do 12 facility-based depth interviews and two focus groups per day in each of three cities: the moderator as Superman!
• A client (at least I think she was) in a crowded viewing room takes me aside and strongly suggests that I stick to the discussion script and not probe at my discretion: the moderator as Human Copy Machine!
• A client insists I show a respondent a rather confrontational advertising concept despite my strong suggestion that it will represent a distinct ethnic slur to this particular respondent (it did!): the moderator as good cop/bad cop!
• A client demands that I phone back several respondents to ask a question that was not part of the original questionnaire nor listed among the original study objectives (I didn't!): the moderator as psychic!
• A client insists on six revisions to a final report, constantly demanding specific input and "analytic interpretations" that were not a part of the original discussion guide design or study objectives: the moderator as tormented fictional playwright!
• A client-written discussion guide full of role-playing and abstract projection techniques results in confusion and flat group dynamics in a focus group of pragmatic professionals with advance scientific degrees: the moderator as star of Shoot the Messenger!
• A client insists that a single focus group will give him/her all the input needed: the moderator as star of Shoot the Messenger - Part II!
• A Friday telephone briefing to go over a client-written discussion guide for a series of complex interviews to begin the following Monday is canceled because the discussion guide is not finished (translation: the discussion guide is way too long and the marketing "team" cannot agree on which questions to cut or how to format it to work more efficiently): the moderator as star of Back to the Future - Parts I, II and III!

Suitable answers

Having personally faced these challenges - to my pride, to my experience, to my ego - and having heard similar commentary from a number of colleagues, I have embarked on an ever-widening quest for suitable answers to the dilemma of how best to serve the client's qualitative market research needs while doing what you know to be right. Are we innovators, chameleons or puppets? Or do we need to be the all-powerful Wizard of Oz?

Make no mistake about it, under the best of circumstances the moderator is often between a rock and a hard place. If you dispute the client's way of doing things, you risk losing that client. If you follow fallacious study guidelines, you risk compromising your professional principles.

While I do not claim to have definitive answers or solutions, I do have some thoughts that I hope may serve to spark a dialogue among those of you reading this article:

• Be patient. Establish a base of client/researcher trust over time. Do not try to do a major overhaul of the client's thinking before the first interview of the first day of your first study together.
• On the other hand, do not be afraid to turn down a potential job that looks or sounds like a script for The Road to Perdition.
• If you find yourself on the job and dealing with that proverbial client from hell, stay out of the heat as much as possible. Find a quiet corner in the facility (outside of the viewing room) where you can go during down time to review your notes, check your voicemail and e-mail messages, have lunch, chant your mantra, curse softly under your breath, etc.
• If you come into a viewing room on day one of a project and find it full of people banging away on laptops, whispering into cell phones and eating M&Ms, quietly but firmly insist on a designated liaison to convey comments or requests from the group as a whole.
• Think of your projects as a series of skirmishes - with clients, respondents, airline schedules, facility personnel, recruiters, etc. That's what makes it all so challenging and exciting (and occasionally quite frustrating). Focus on the skirmishes - try to win as many as you can but don't be upset if you fail to win the war. The next war will come along soon.
• Always clarify the deliverables in your proposal. If the RFP is vague or unclear, ask for more details. It may be better to lose a project up front than to be constantly disputing gray areas or repeatedly redefining variables after a study is already underway.
• One of the aspects of qualitative market research that I enjoy most is its variability. Clients change, products change, questions change, respondents change. It is best not to dwell on the negative bumps in the market research highway of life; treat them as part of the learning experience and move on. Keep your eyes on the road ahead and stop looking in the rearview mirror.
• Go ahead, ask the client how they want it. If you have never worked with this person (these people) before, you may avoid potential conflicts by asking them to describe moderator styles they have found most effective in the past. Remember, the successful magician (moderator) is an actor playing the part of a magician (moderator).
• Aggravation is easier to deal with if you are being compensated for it. For those projects that sound like an extended migraine waiting to happen, bump your estimate up to help offset anticipated suffering. If you lose the project because your estimate is too high, you will have less aggravation in your life. If you do get the project, you can look forward to the prospect of going to a very nice restaurant (perhaps in your recently purchased suit or outfit) to celebrate a job well done (and finally over with).
• Do not subvert your professional standards. Do not be afraid to say, "I just don't feel right doing that." Do what you know to be right.
• And finally, to paraphrase an old saying, "If all our clients were perfect, we wouldn't have any." Stay cool - be patient and calm with clients who lack experience (and seem unconcerned about it). See yourself in the role of wise, calm and experienced teacher/partner/mentor rather than as an adversary in a marketing research wrestling match.

Hot button?

So what do you think? Am I that dinosaur trying for one last roar or have I hit a qualitative market research hot button? Are there ideas you want to share pertaining to the issues I've raised? Would you like to offer a different perspective or offer solutions I haven't thought of (or criticism of those that I have thought of)?

Tell me where you stand. E-mail your comments to drsimon@mindspring.com and we just might wind up with some helpful suggestions and enough interesting input for a follow-up article.

In the meantime, be happy! Do good research!